Lets get this straight RIGHT now...

[Galian Beast]

It isn't just about mobility. Although that is obviously a plus. We all like to see the QB punish defenses for bringing too many guys.

But they KEY issue is getting the ball away. Bledsoe just doesn't do it. We hardly move the ball down the field with Bledsoe unless its a long bomb (which we rarely throw). With Romo we drive down people throats.

Two of the interceptions were fairly odd ball. The only pick that was real was the last one that was run back for a td.

Romo starts the game, we would have won that game, easily. And I wouldn't blame just the defense. They were on the field longer than they should have been. And things like the ref getting in Williams' way simply didn't help us out.

Romo doesn't take the sack in the endzone, and most likely doesn't throw the pick in the end zone. Thats 9 differential in the first half alone... Which caused us to become extremely one dimensional and force things in the 2nd.

 

[Smashmouth24]

It's about bad decisions. Bledsoe has been making them from the day he was drafted. There's at least a good chance Romo can learn to avoid them and manage the game. Bad decisions.

 

[Galian Beast]

I agree he turned the ball over in key places three times this year. And in the seattle game last year? I think the guy has cost us all three games this year.

And I backing him for a long time, I just can't honestly do it anymore.

 

[Dcowboy84]

The only part of that i disagree with is that Romo would not have avoided the sack in the endzone. Lavar was through that hole so fast Bledsoe barely stood up before he was hit. That was just a greatly timed blitz.

The rest however, you are correct. The key play that describes what you are talking about is when Bledsoe held the ball for like 20 min waiting for Strahan to rush, come all the way around through the middle and get him.

That play expressed the main aspect of Bledsoe's game that sucks.

 

[LarryCanadian]

Excellent Point.

I see 2 advantages or at least potential "upsides" from going to Romo.

1. He makes fast decisions. Now we are all concerned whether those decisions will be good ones or not, but Romo seems to react very quickly and can make quick surveys of fields to find open receiver. Sometimes he doesn't reign in his tendency to try and force plays which cost us massively last night as he was picked and could have been picked more on some dumb decisions. But he is capable of getting ball out fast and doesn't tend to hold ball too long like Bledsoe.

2. Romo can buy time in and outside of pocket. He seems capable of throwing on the move and can both take off and do some sidestepping to buy that extra second. This is key to our offense when we have 2 excellent playmakers in TO and Glenn on outside and a TE that can be a big play guy. Those guys need time to get open, and that extra split second can be the difference. The fact that Romo can hurt you with his feet a la Quincy Carter is a factor as well, and I'd rather him run for 3 yards where Bledsoe would have been sacked, than make a dumb forced sandlot football throw.

Good points in original post. It isn't just mobility, it's buying time and making quick decisions. When you burn the blitzing D a few times all of a sudden the pressure can be reduced too.

Larry

 

[DMX690]

It isn't just about mobility. Although that is obviously a plus. We all like to see the QB punish defenses for bringing too many guys.

But they KEY issue is getting the ball away. Bledsoe just doesn't do it. We hardly move the ball down the field with Bledsoe unless its a long bomb (which we rarely throw). With Romo we drive down people throats.

Two of the interceptions were fairly odd ball. The only pick that was real was the last one that was run back for a td.

Romo starts the game, we would have won that game, easily. And I wouldn't blame just the defense. They were on the field longer than they should have been. And things like the ref getting in Williams' way simply didn't help us out.

Romo doesn't take the sack in the endzone, and most likely doesn't throw the pick in the end zone. Thats 9 differential in the first half alone... Which caused us to become extremely one dimensional and force things in the 2nd.

Let's be fair God himself couldn't have avoid the safety. But yes Romo should bring a element missing at the QB position since sadly Quincy Carter.

 

[CowboyBlog]

It isn't just about mobility. Although that is obviously a plus. We all like to see the QB punish defenses for bringing too many guys.

But they KEY issue is getting the ball away. Bledsoe just doesn't do it. We hardly move the ball down the field with Bledsoe unless its a long bomb (which we rarely throw). With Romo we drive down people throats.

Two of the interceptions were fairly odd ball. The only pick that was real was the last one that was run back for a td.

Romo starts the game, we would have won that game, easily. And I wouldn't blame just the defense. They were on the field longer than they should have been. And things like the ref getting in Williams' way simply didn't help us out.

Romo doesn't take the sack in the endzone, and most likely doesn't throw the pick in the end zone. Thats 9 differential in the first half alone... Which caused us to become extremely one dimensional and force things in the 2nd.

No offense, but I have never seen so many wrong statements in such a short series of words.

 

[DBoys]

I agree he turned the ball over in key places three times this year. And in the seattle game last year? I think the guy has cost us all three games this year.

And I backing him for a long time, I just can't honestly do it anymore.

You and me both the PHI game was it for me.

 

[DBoys]

No offense, but I have never seen so many wrong statements in such a short series of words.

Here you go again

 

[Derinyar]

It isn't just about mobility. Although that is obviously a plus. We all like to see the QB punish defenses for bringing too many guys.

But they KEY issue is getting the ball away. Bledsoe just doesn't do it. We hardly move the ball down the field with Bledsoe unless its a long bomb (which we rarely throw). With Romo we drive down people throats.

Two of the interceptions were fairly odd ball. The only pick that was real was the last one that was run back for a td.

Romo starts the game, we would have won that game, easily. And I wouldn't blame just the defense. They were on the field longer than they should have been. And things like the ref getting in Williams' way simply didn't help us out.

Romo doesn't take the sack in the endzone, and most likely doesn't throw the pick in the end zone. Thats 9 differential in the first half alone... Which caused us to become extremely one dimensional and force things in the 2nd.

All three of the picks were squarely his fault. He threw the ball three times when he shouldn't have. The first one he was trying to throw to a TE he couldn't see that was in double coverage, IE a bad decision. The second int was trying to throw the ball to a player who was behind 3 DL and was covered, once again a bad decision. The third one looked pretty much like Bledsoe's in Philly, that everyone seems to say is inexcusable by any QB.

Romo has some things going for him, but right now they are really outweighed by his inexperience and impulsiveness. Hopefully he can over come that.

 

[CoCo]

Excellent Point.

I see 2 advantages or at least potential "upsides" from going to Romo.

1. He makes fast decisions. Now we are all concerned whether those decisions will be good ones or not, but Romo seems to react very quickly and can make quick surveys of fields to find open receiver. Sometimes he doesn't reign in his tendency to try and force plays which cost us massively last night as he was picked and could have been picked more on some dumb decisions. But he is capable of getting ball out fast and doesn't tend to hold ball too long like Bledsoe.

2. Romo can buy time in and outside of pocket. He seems capable of throwing on the move and can both take off and do some sidestepping to buy that extra second. This is key to our offense when we have 2 excellent playmakers in TO and Glenn on outside and a TE that can be a big play guy. Those guys need time to get open, and that extra split second can be the difference. The fact that Romo can hurt you with his feet a la Quincy Carter is a factor as well, and I'd rather him run for 3 yards where Bledsoe would have been sacked, than make a dumb forced sandlot football throw.

Good points in original post. It isn't just mobility, it's buying time and making quick decisions. When you burn the blitzing D a few times all of a sudden the pressure can be reduced too.

Larry

I very much agree with this post.

And its also not about eliminating sacks entirely (totally unrealistic) or blaming Bledsoe for every sack he took.

The question is whether Romo's inexperience and carelessness will offset the pluses he offers as listed above. But frankly, I think Bledsoe and our O-line was certain failure and at least adding Romo renews hope. We shall see.

 

[jimmy40]

With Romo we drive down people throats.


When was this? Preseason?


Two of the interceptions were fairly odd ball. The only pick that was real was the last one that was run back for a td.


I don't remember you saying the fumble that fell out of the sky into Ware's hands and returned for a TD wasn't real.


Romo starts the game, we would have won that game, easily. And I wouldn't blame just the defense. They were on the field longer than they should have been. And things like the ref getting in Williams' way simply didn't help us out.

The Giants are better than us no matter who starts at QB and the ref getting in William's way probably saved him the embarissment of missplaying another deep pass.


Romo doesn't take the sack in the endzone, and most likely doesn't throw the pick in the end zone. Thats 9 differential in the first half alone... Which caused us to become extremely one dimensional and force things in the 2nd.


Michael Vick takes that sack in the endzone and the only reason we were in the game was because of Plaxico pushing Newman into the interception.

 

[Crown Royal]

Bledsoe is not responsible for the safety, EXCEPT, I think it is possible that he wasn't changing the snap count. Heck, I actually don't even blame the OL for that one - it was just a great play - the blitz was called to a spot where the gap was available.

That being said, I think that Bledsoe has some snap count issues.

 

[joseephuss]

All three of the picks were squarely his fault. He threw the ball three times when he shouldn't have. The first one he was trying to throw to a TE he couldn't see that was in double coverage, IE a bad decision. The second int was trying to throw the ball to a player who was behind 3 DL and was covered, once again a bad decision. The third one looked pretty much like Bledsoe's in Philly, that everyone seems to say is inexcusable by any QB.

Romo has some things going for him, but right now they are really outweighed by his inexperience and impulsiveness. Hopefully he can over come that.

Nope, on the 3rd INT Crayton was actually slightly open. Romo just threw a bad pass. 1 of 3 was not a bad decision.

 

[Cowboy4ever]

All of these are good points and valid. But for me its not about his mobility, his inexperience or my total disgust of Bledsoe, its about the Cowboys. I am just tired of seeing old rejects on this team as the starting QB. Since Aikman, not one legitimate starter has been signed. The facts are Bledsoe, even if he played the best he can, would not win a playoff game, he is delivery is to slow, his reads are non exisit and his decisions are horrible. Now we have Romo, is he the answer,, I have NO IDEA! But at the very least, the hand has been played and the organization MUST make a move. Safe to Say Bledsoe will not be back, if he stays this year. Jerry and Bill (if he stays) MUST address the QB this off season. Finally!!

 

[Cowboy4ever]

Bledsoe is not responsible for the safety, EXCEPT, I think it is possible that he wasn't changing the snap count. Heck, I actually don't even blame the OL for that one - it was just a great play - the blitz was called to a spot where the gap was available.

That being said, I think that Bledsoe has some snap count issues.

Maybe so,, but I think SOME of the blame could be on Bledsoe for the safety and maybe a couple of other sacks as well. I can't say this for sure mind you,, but I know the QB does call protection from under center based on what he sees the D doing. Esp on some of the sacks where no one bothers to pick up pro bowl players,, something seems off there.. either the line is not communicating with one another or Bledsoe is calling the wrong protection at the line.. hard to say which

 

[THEHEREAFTER]

Bledsoe biggest issue isn't when the pocket completely collapses. We all know he's a dead duck back there when that happens. He seems to not grasp that pocket "feel." He doesn't naturally sidestep, step up, and manuever in the pocket. If you're an immobile QB you atleast need to have this part down and he doesn't. Honestly, he looks downright goofy at times.

 

[bringbackbrisby]

It isn't just about mobility. Although that is obviously a plus. We all like to see the QB punish defenses for bringing too many guys.

But they KEY issue is getting the ball away. Bledsoe just doesn't do it. We hardly move the ball down the field with Bledsoe unless its a long bomb (which we rarely throw). With Romo we drive down people throats.

Two of the interceptions were fairly odd ball. The only pick that was real was the last one that was run back for a td.

Romo starts the game, we would have won that game, easily. And I wouldn't blame just the defense. They were on the field longer than they should have been. And things like the ref getting in Williams' way simply didn't help us out.


Romo doesn't take the sack in the endzone, and most likely doesn't throw the pick in the end zone. Thats 9 differential in the first half alone... Which caused us to become extremely one dimensional and force things in the 2nd.

Man, this is some bull your saying. i mean, seriously... do u really believe this stuff or are u just talking nonsense for the hell of it?